The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Report - October 4, 1995 PHOR 4, CIT1( OF LOD! COUNCIL COMMUNICATION c�trRpw+�' AGENDA TITLE: Set Public Hearing for November 1, 1995 to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation that the City Council adopt the 1995 Growth Management Allocations. MEETING DATE: October 4, 1995 PREPARED BY: Senior Planner RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council set a Public Hearing to consider the Planning Commission's Recommendation that City Council adopt the 1995 Growth Management Allocations. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As a part of the City of Lodi Growth Management Plan for Residential Development, the City annually conducts an allocation process for residential permits. Under this process, all residential projects of 5 or more units must apply for building allocations for the next year. The plan is based on a maximum annual growth rate of 2% per year, which this year translates into 408 building permit allocations. Of these 408 allocations, 65% or 265 are single-family allocations, 10% or 41 are medium density allocations and 25% or 102 are high density allocations. This year all allocation requests were for single-family units. All projects requesting allocations must submit a request stating the number of allocations they are seeking. The projects are scored on a set of criteria previously established by City ordinance. The highest scoring projects have the greatest chance of receiving their allocation request, the lowest scoring, the least chance. Following their Public Hearing the Planning Commission adopted the following list of Growth Management allocations: Projects (Listed in Requested Recommended in order of pts. scored 1995 Allocations 1995 Allocations Towne Ranch 37 37 Parisis Property 39 39 Thayer Property 34 34 Bridgetown 62 53 Century Meadows 1 113 52 Century Meadows 3 99 51 384 266 APPROVED: THOMAS A. IFETEF City Manager 4M LJ recycled AaOer CC9528.DOT cc -1 Council Communication Meeting Date: October 4, 1995 Page 2 Projects not receiving allocations: Requested 1995 Allocations Helmle 61 Century Meadows 2 58 119 Recommended 1995 Allocations 0 0 0 The full 1995 single-family allocations of 265 units were allocated. No requests were submitted for medium or high density allocations FUNDING: None required DM/ca Attachment (7,Luj" David Morimoto Senior Planner MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi, Community Development Department TO: Community Development Director FROM: Assistant Planner, Mark Meissner DATE: Thursday, August 24, 1995 SUBJECT: GROWTH MANAGEMENT SCORING & ALLOCATION SUMMARY The development plans submitted for review this year are all listed in the table below. This memo addresses the reasoning behind the scoring of each project and later explains the building permit allocations. The scoring of each development plan is based on Evaluation Criteria adopted as part of the City's Growth Management Ordinance. 1995 Development Plan Scoring Summary NOTE: PROJECTS WITH 100 PTS. FOR CRITERIA 'C' HAVE REQUESTED ALLOCATIONS FOR PRIORITY AREA TWO. A COMMITMENT FROM DEVELOPERS TO FRONT FUNDS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A MAJOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IS NECESSARY. CRITERIA DOES NOT APPLY TO SDIGLE-FAM D.Y PROJECTS Towne Ranch, the first project on the list, is an existing and developing project located at 3032 West Turner Road. The project is at the North-West corner of Lodi, adjacent to Turner Road to the North, to Lower Sacramento Road to the East, to the developed Park West Subdivision to the South, and to the Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal to the West. The points shown are based on the approved development plan for the entire Towne Ranch project, not just the portion being considered for allocations this year. CRITERIA N u a O L LrC L LqC `J EaC C� V a4 K C F � OG � vI vI ii PROJECT . A. BC D I D2 D3 D4 E** . F IG H'*:: T. J :>I TOTALS TOWNE RANCH 7 7 200 5 8 8 4 0 81 01 0 20 10 277 PARISIS PROPERTY 5 0 200 3 0 7 0 0 10 0 0 15 10 250 THAYER PROPERTY 3 0 200 0 0 4 0 0 10 0 0 15 10 242 BRIDGETOWN 5 7 100 5 0 4 0 0 10 0 0 15 10 156 CENTURY MEADOWS 1 5 0 100 5 * 8 0 0 13 0 0 10 10 151 CENTURY MEADOWS 3 31 01 1001 3 * 8 0 0 15 0 0 10 10 149 HELMLE PROPERTY 5 0 100 3 * 0 9 0 0 0 0 10 10 137 CENTURY MEADOWS 2 3 0 100 3 * 0 0 0 10 0 0 10 10 136 NOTE: PROJECTS WITH 100 PTS. FOR CRITERIA 'C' HAVE REQUESTED ALLOCATIONS FOR PRIORITY AREA TWO. A COMMITMENT FROM DEVELOPERS TO FRONT FUNDS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A MAJOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IS NECESSARY. CRITERIA DOES NOT APPLY TO SDIGLE-FAM D.Y PROJECTS Towne Ranch, the first project on the list, is an existing and developing project located at 3032 West Turner Road. The project is at the North-West corner of Lodi, adjacent to Turner Road to the North, to Lower Sacramento Road to the East, to the developed Park West Subdivision to the South, and to the Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal to the West. The points shown are based on the approved development plan for the entire Towne Ranch project, not just the portion being considered for allocations this year. • The Towne Ranch project received 7 points in category A., Agricultural Land Conflicts, for being adjacent to agricultural land on one side, the North side. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 7 points were awarded in category B., On-site Agricultural Land Mitigation, for designing the subdivision with reverse -frontage lots and, a solid wall with landscaping. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 200 points were awarded in category C., General Location, for being located within the Priority Area One boundary. Maximum points for this category is 200. • 5 points were awarded in category Dl., Relationship to Existing Development, for abutting to existing development on two sides, the East and South. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 8 points were awarded in -category D2., Relationship to Public Services (Wastewater), for extending the Master Plan sewer line in Evergreen Drive within the project boundaries. The maximum points for this category is 10. • 8 points were awarded in category D3., Relationship to Public Services (Water), for extending the Master Plan water line in Evergreen Drive within the project boundaries. The maximum points for this category is 13. • 4 points were awarded in category D4., Relationship to Public Services (Drainage), since the project requires the expansion of Westgate Basin. The maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category E., Promotion of Open Space, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 8 points were awarded in category F., Traffic (Street Improvements), for extending a Master Plan street (Evergreen Drive) within the project boundaries. • 0 points were awarded in category G., Housing (Affordability), because the development plan does not specify whether there will be any affordable housing units or programs to make the units more affordable. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category H., Site Plan and Project Design, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 20 points were awarded in category I., Schools (Proximity). Five of the points were for being within one half of a mile from a proposed elementary school, ten of the points were for being within one half of a mile from a proposed middle school, and the remaining 5 points were for also being within two miles of an existing high school. Maximum points for this category is 30. • 10 points were awarded in category J., Fire Protection (Proximity), for being within a three minute emergency vehicle driving time from the nearest fire station. The Automatic Aid Agreement between the City of Lodi and the -Woodbridge Rural Fire District has recently brought this project within the three minute emergency vehicle driving distance. Maximum points for this category is 10. The Towne Ranch development plan received a total of 277 points, placing it at the top of the list with the greatest development potential. Parisis Property, the second project on the list is a new project located at 3883 East Harney Lane. The project is near the south-east corner of Lodi, adjacent to Stockton Street on the West, to Harney Lane on the South, to the undeveloped Richards Ranch subdivision to the North, and the proposed Thayer Property Project to the West. • The Parisis Property project received S points in category A., Agricultural Land Conflicts, for being adjacent to agricultural land on two sides, the South and East sides. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category B., On-site Agricultural Land Mitigation, for not providing a buffer between the project and adjacent agricultural land. Maximum points -for this category is 10. • 200 points were awarded in category C., General Location, for being located within the Priority Area One boundary. Maximum points for this category is 200. • 3 points were awarded in category D 1., Relationship to Existing Development, for abutting to existing development on one side, the West. Maximum points for this category is 10. 0 points were awarded in category D2., Relationship to Public Services (Wastewater), since the project requires the extension of wastewater lines from Bluejay Way in the Johnson Ranch subdivision to Stockton Street through the proposed Richards Ranch and Thayer Property developments and an undeveloped parcel north of the project site. The necessary right-of-way has not been acquired. The maximum points for this category is 10. 7 points were awarded in category D3., Relationship to Public Services (Water). This score represents the average of 10 points for being adjacent to the existing Master Plan water main in Stockton Street designed to serve the project and 4 points for requiring the extension of a Master Plan line outside the project boundaries but within existing right-of-way (Harney Lane). The maximum points for this category is 13. • 0 points were awarded in category D4., Relationship to Public Services (Drainage), since the project requires the extension of storm drain lines from Bluejay Way in the Johnson Ranch subdivision to Stockton Street through the proposed Richards Ranch and Thayer Property developments and an undeveloped parcel north of the project site. The necessary right-of-way has not been acquired. The maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category E., Promotion of Open Space, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. MGhf C:ILIBRARY\GROWTHMAtGM95REPO.DOC 3 • 10 points were awarded in category F., Traffic (Street Improvements), will widen and improve existing facilities (Harney Lane and Stockton Street). The maximum points for this category is 15. 0 points were awarded in category G., Housing (Affordability), because the development plan does not specify whether there will be any affordable housing units or programs to make the units more affordable. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category H., Site Plan and Project Design, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 15 points were awarded in category I., Schools (Proximity). Ten of the points were for being within one quarter of a mile from a proposed elementary school, and the remaining 5 points were for also being within two miles of an existing high school. Maximum points for this category is 30. • 10 points were awarded in category J., Fire Protection (Proximity), for being within a three minute emergency vehicle driving time from the nearest fire station. Maximum points for this category is 10. The Parisis Property development plan received a total of 250 points, placing it second on the list. Thayer Property, the third project on the list is a new project located at 3921 & 3953 East Harney Lane. The project is near the south-east corner of Lodi, adjacent to the proposed Parisis Property project on the West, to Harney Lane on the South, to the undeveloped Richards Ranch subdivision to the North, and agricultural land to the East. • The Thayer Property project received 3 points in category A., Agricultural Land Conflicts, for being adjacent to agricultural land on three sides, the South, East, and West sides. Maximum points for this category is 10. 0 0 points were awarded in category B., On-site Agricultural Land Mitigation, for not providing a buffer between the project and adjacent agricultural land. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 200 points were awarded in category C., General Location, for being located within the Priority Area One boundary. Maximum points for this category is 200. • 0 points were awarded in category D1., Relationship to Existing Development, because the project is surrounded by undeveloped land. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category D2., Relationship to Public Services (Wastewater), since the project requires the extension of wastewater lines from Bluejay Way in the Johnson Ranch subdivision to Stockton Street through the proposed Richards Ranch and Parisis Property developments and an undeveloped parcel north of the project site. The right-of-way has not been acquired. The maximum points for this category is 10. • 4 points were awarded in category D3., Relationship to Public Services (Water), for extending a Master Plan water line outside its boundaries, but within existing right-of-way (Harney Lane). The maximum points in this category is 13. • 0 points were awarded in category D4., Relationship to Public Services (Drainage), since the project requires the extension of storm drain lines from Bluejay Way in the Johnson Ranch subdivision to Stockton Street through the proposed Richards Ranch and Parisis Property developments and an undeveloped parcel north of the project site. The right-of-way has not been acquired. The maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category E., Promotion of Open Space, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 10 points were awarded in category F., Traffic (Street Improvements), for widening and improving an existing facility (Harney Lane). The maximum points in this category is 15. • 0 points were awarded in category G., Housing (Affordability), because the development plan does not specify whether there will be any affordable housing units or programs to make the units more affordable. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category H., Site Plan and Project Design, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 15 points were awarded in category I., Schools (Proximity). Ten of the points were for being within one quarter of a mile from a proposed elementary school, and the remaining 5 points were for also being within two miles of an existing high school. Maximum points for this category is 30. • 10 points were awarded in category J., Fire Protection (Proximity), for being within a three minute emergency vehicle driving time from the nearest fire station. Maximum points for this category is 10. The Thayer Property development plan received a total of 242 points, placing it third on the list. Bridgetown, the fourth project on the list is a new project located at 451 East Turner Road. The project is at the North-West corner of Lodi, adjacent to the Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal on the North and West, the City on the East, and Turner Road on the South. • The Bridgetown project received 5 points in category A., Agricultural Land Conflicts, for being adjacent to agricultural land on two sides, the East and North sides. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 7 points were awarded in category B., On-site Agricultural Land Mitigation, for providing a buffer between the project and adjacent agricultural land. Maximum points for this categoryis 10. MGM C:U..IBRARY\GROWTH%L41GM95REPO.DOC 5 • 100 points were awarded in category C., General Location, for being located within the Priority Area Two boundary. Maximum points for this category is 200. • 5 points were awarded in category D1., Relationship to Existing Development, for abutting to existing development on two sides, the South and East. . Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category D2., Relationship to Public Services (Wastewater), since the project requires extension of wastewater lines through planned projects in the Towne Ranch development south of Turner Road. The necessary right-of-way in Towne Ranch has not yet been acquired. The maximum points in this category is 10. • 4 points were awarded in category D3., Relationship to Public Services (Water), for extending Master Plan water lines outside its boundaries, but within existing right-of-way (Turner Road). The maximum points in this category is 13. • 0 points were awarded in category D4., Relationship to Public Services (Drainage), since the project requires extension of storm drain lines through planned projects in the Towne Ranch development south of Turner Road. The necessary right-of-way in Towne Ranch has not yet been acquired. The maximum points in this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category E., Promotion of Open Space, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 10 points were awarded in category F., Traffic (Street Improvements), for improving an existing facility (Turner Road). The maximum points in this category is 15. • 0 points were awarded in category G., Housing (Affordability), because the development plan does not specify whether there will be any affordable housing units or programs to make the units more affordable. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category H., Site Plan and Project Design, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 15 points were awarded in category I., Schools (Proximity). Five of the points were for being within one half of a mile from a proposed elementary school, and the remaining ten points were for being within one half of a mile from a proposed middle school. • 10 points were awarded in category J., Fire Protection (Proximity), for being within a three minute emergency vehicle driving time from the nearest fire station. The Automatic Aid Agreement between the City of Lodi and the Woodbridge Rural Fire District has recently brought this project within the three minute emergency vehicle driving distance. Maximum points for this category is 10. The Bridgetown development plan received a total of 156 points, placing it fourth on the list. Century Meadows 1, the fifth project on the list is an existing and developing project located at 2081 West Harney Lane. The project is near the South-West corner of Lodi, adjacent to the Century Meadows Two subdivision on the West, Century Boulevard on the North, Harney Lane on the South, and the WID canal and the City on the East. • The Century Meadows 1 project received 7 points in category A., Agricultural Land Conflicts, for being adjacent to agricultural land on one side, the South side. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category B., On-site Agricultural Land Mitigation, for providing no buffer between the project and adjacent agricultural land. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 100 points were- awarded in category C., General Location, for being located within the.. Priority Area Two boundary. Maximum points for this category is 200. 5 points were awarded in category D1., Relationship to Existing Development, for abutting to existing development on two sides, the North and East. Maximum points for this category is 10. • No points were awarded in category D2., Relationship to Public Services (Wastewater), because a commitment from the developer/s of the Century Meadows 1 project to front funds for the installation of a major public improvement is necessary. The project requires the installation of the Harney Lane sewer trunk line and a lift station at the future intersection of Harney Lane and Mills Avenue. Funds are not available in the Sewer Development Impact Mitigation Fee Fund. The maximum points for this category is 10. • 8 points were awarded in category D3., Relationship to Public Services (Water), for extending a Master Plan water line within the project boundaries from Harney Lane to the proposed Lexington Drive. The maximum points in this category is 13. • 0 points were awarded in category D4., Relationship to Public Services (Drainage), since the storm drains to serve this project will have to be extended to Mills Avenue through the Century Meadows Two and Century Meadows Three projects. The necessary right-of-way has not been acquired. The maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category E., Promotion of Open Space, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. 13 points were awarded in category F., Traffic (Street Improvements). This score represents a combination of 10 points for widening and improving an existing facility (Harney Lane) and 3 points for improving circulation by providing additional access from Harney Lane to adjacent development (proposed Muirfield Drive). The maximum points in this category is 13. MGM C:N.LIBRARY\GROWrH,\La\GM95REPO.DOC 7 • 0 points were awarded in category G., Housing (Affordability), because the development plan does not specify whether there will be any affordable housing units or programs to make the units more affordable. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category H., Site Plan and Project Design, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 10 points were awarded in category I., Schools (Proximity). Ten points were for being within one mile of an existing high school, Tokay High. • 10 points were awarded in category J., Fire Protection (Proximity), for being within a three minute emergency vehicle driving time from the nearest fire station. Maximum points for this category is 10. The Century Meadows 1 development plan received a total of 153 points, placing it fifth on the list. ' Century Meadows 3, the sixth project on the list is an existing and developing project located at 1933 West Harney Lane. The project is near the South-West corner of Lodi, which is near the South-West corner of Lodi, adjacent to the Century Meadows Two subdivision on the East, Century Boulevard on the North, Harney Lane on the South, and agricultural land to the West. • The Century Meadows 3 project received 3 points in category A., Agricultural Land Conflicts, for being adjacent to agricultural land on three sides, the South, East and West sides. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category B., On-site Agricultural Land Mitigation, for providing no buffer between the project and adjacent agricultural land. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 100 points were awarded in category C., General Location, for being located within the Priority Area Two boundary. Maximum points for this category is 200. • 3 points were awarded in category D1., Relationship to Existing Development, for abutting to existing development on one side, the North. Maximum points for this category is 10. • No points were awarded in category D2., Relationship to Public Services (Wastewater), because a commitment from the developer/s of the Century Meadows 3 project to front funds for the installation of a major public improvement is necessary. The project requires the installation of the Harney Lane sewer trunk line and a lift station at the future intersection of Harney Lane and Mills Avenue. Funds are not available in the Sewer Development Impact Mitigation Fee Fund. The maximum points for this category is 10. • 8 points were awarded in category D3., Relationship to Public Services (Water), for extending a Master Plan water line within its boundaries in the future Mills Avenue and Lexington Drive. The maximum points in this category is 13. • 0 points were awarded in category D4., Relationship to Public Services (Drainage), since the project requires extension of storm drain lines to the west through the Century Meadows Four project or the undeveloped parcel south of the Century Meadows Four project. The necessary right-of-way has not been acquired. The maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category E., Promotion of Open Space, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 15 points were awarded in category F., Traffic (Street Improvements), This score represents a combination of 10 points for widening and improving an existing facility (Harney Lane) and 5 points for improving circulation to adjacent development by extending Mills Avenue to Harney Lane. The maximum points in this category is 15. • 0 points were awarded in category G., Housing (Affordability), because the development plan does not specify whether there will be any affordable housing units or programs to make the units more affordable. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category H., Site Plan and Project Design, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 10 points were awarded in category I., Schools (Proximity). Ten points were awarded for being within one mile of an existing high school, Tokay High. • 10 points were awarded in category J., Fire Protection (Proximity), for being within a three minute emergency vehicle driving time from the nearest fire station. Maximum points for this category is 10. The Century Meadows 3 development plan received a total of 149 points, it project sixth on the list. Helmle Property, the seventh project on the list is a new project located at 2109 West Kettleman Lane. The project is adjacent to the Roget property (future park) on the West, to the Sunwest subdivision on the North, to Tienda Drive on the South, and Agricultural land to the East. • The Helmle Property project received 5 points in category A., Agricultural Land Conflicts, for being adjacent to agricultural land on two sides, the South and East sides. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category B., On-site Agricultural Land Mitigation, for providing no buffer between the project and adjacent agricultural land. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 100 points were awarded in category C., General Location, for being located within the Priority Area Two boundary. Maximum points for this category is 200. MGM C:ILIBRARYIGROWTHI iAIGM95REPO.DOC 9 • 3 points were awarded in category D 1., Relationship to Existing Development, for abutting to existing development on one side, the North. Maximum points for this category is 10. • No points were awarded in category D2., Relationship to Public Services (Wastewater), because a commitment from the developerls of the Helmle Properties to front funds for the installation of a major public improvement is necessary. The project requires the extension of the Mills Avenue sewer trunk line and construction of a lift station at the future intersection with Mills Avenue on the north side of Kettleman Lane. The necessary right-of-way has not been acquired and funds are not available in the Sewer Development Impact Mitigation Fee Fund. The maximum points in this category is 10. • No points were awarded in category D3., Relationship to Public Services (Water), since the water line will have to be looped to Tienda Drive or Kettleman Lane through adjacent parcels. The right-of-way has not been acquired. The maximum points in this category is 13. • 9 points were awarded in category D4., Relationship to Public Services (Drainage) This score represents the average of 10 points for being adjacent tct a Master Plan storm drain line designed to serve the Project (existing 60" trunk line) and 8 points for requiring the extension of a Master Plan storm drain line within its boundaries in the future Tienda Drive. The maximum points in this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category E., Promotion of Open Space, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 0 points were awarded in category F., Traffic (Street Improvements), since the project requires extension of a Master Plan street (Tienda Drive) outside the project boundaries and right-of-way has not been acquired. The maximum points for this category is 15. e 0 points were awarded in category G., Housing (Affordability), because the development plan does not specify whether there will be any affordable housing units or programs to make the units more affordable. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category H., Site Plan and Project Design, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. 0 10 points were awarded in category I., Schools (Proximity). Five points were awarded for being within one mile of an existing middle school, Senior Elementary, and the remaining five points were awarded for being within two miles of an existing high school, Tokay High. • 10 points were awarded in category J., Fire Protection (Proximity), for being within a three minute emergency vehicle driving time from the nearest fire station. Maximum points for this category is 10. The Helmle Property development plan received a total of 137 points, placing it seventh on the list. 10 Century Meadows 2, the eighth project on the list is an existing and developing project located at 1817 West Harney Lane. The project is near the South-West corner of Lodi, which is adjacent to the Century Meadows One subdivision on the East, to the Century Meadows 3 subdivision on the West, to Century Boulevard on the North, and Harney Lane to the South. • The Century Meadows 2 project received 3 points in category A., Agricultural Land Conflicts, for being adjacent to agricultural land on three sides, the South, East and West sides. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category B., On-site Agricultural Land Mitigation, for providing no buffer between the project and adjacent agricultural land. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 100 points were awarded in category C., General Location, for being located within the.. Priority Area Two boundary. Maximum points for this category is 200. • 3 points were awarded in category D1., Relationship to Existing Development, for abutting to existing development on one side, the North. Maximum points for this category is 10. • No points were awarded in category D2., Relationship to Public Services (Wastewater), because a commitment from the developer/s of the Helmle Properties to front funds for the installation of a major public improvement is necessary. The project requires the installation of the Harney Lane sewer trunk line and a lift station at the future intersection of Harney Lane and Mills Avenue. Funds are not available in the Sewer Development Impact Mitigation Fee Fund. The maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category D3., Relationship to Public Services (Water), since this project requires the looping of water lines through the Century Meadows One or Century Meadows Three projects for which right-of-way is not available. The maximum points in this category is 13. • 0 points were awarded in category D4., Relationship to Public Services (Drainage), since this project requires the extension of storm drain lines to Mills Avenue through the Century Meadows Three project. The necessary right-of-way has not been acquired. The maximum points in this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category E., Promotion of Open Space, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. • 10 points were awarded in category F., Traffic (Street Improvements), for widening and improving an existing facility (Harney Lane). The maximum points in this category is 15. • 0 points were awarded in category G., Housing (Affordability), because the development plan does not specify whether there will be any affordable housing units or programs to make the units more affordable. Maximum points for this category is 10. • 0 points were awarded in category H., Site Plan and Project Design, because this category does not apply to single-family residential projects. Maximum points for this category is 20. .LLGlt C:\L IBRARY)GROwrHN(AlGM95REPO.DOC 11 10 points were awarded in category I., Schools (Proximity). Ten points were awarded for being within one mile of an existing high school, Tokay High. Maximum points for this category is 30. 10 points were awarded in category J., Fire Protection (Proximity), for being within a three minute emergency vehicle driving time from the nearest fire station. Maximum points for this category is 10. The Century Meadows 2 development plan received a total of 136 points, placing it eighth on the list. 12 City of Lodi Residential Growth Management Schedule Adopted: September 18, 1991 under Ordinance #1521 Year Population 2% Pop. projection Persons/ Household Total units per year Single fam.@ 65% Med density @ 10% High Density @ 25% •• Sep -89 50,990 1,020 2.572 397 258 40 99 Sep•90 52,010 1,040 2.567 404 263 40 101 Sep -91 53,050 1,061 2.630 403 262 40 101 )an -92 53,186 1,064 2.664 399 259 40 100 Jan -93 53,701 1,074 2.680 401 261 40 100 Jan -94 53,903 1,078 2.680 402 261 40 101 Jan -96 55,788 1,116 Est. 2.697 416 270 42 104 Jan -97 56,904 1,138 Est 2.697 425 276 43 106 Jan -98 58,042 1,161 ESL 2.697 433 281 43 108 Jan -99 59,203 1,184 Est 2.697 442 287 44 111 Jan -00 60,387 1,208 Est. 2.697 451 293 1 45 113 Jan -01 61,595 • 1,232 EsL 2.697 460 299 46 115 Jan -02 62,827 1,257 Est. 2.697 469 305 47 117 Jan -03 64,084 1,282 Est. 2.697 478 311 48 120 Jan -04 65,366 1,307 Est. 2.697 488 317 49 122 Jan -05 66,673 1,333 Est. 2.697 497 323 50 124 Jan -06 68,006 1,360 Est 2.697 507 330 51 127 Jan -07 69,366 1,387 Est. 2.697 518 337 52 130 TOTALS:1 8,398 l 5,459 I 840 I 2,100 •• Sep'89 population number equals 2/3 of the population difference of Jan 19 and Jan 190 added to Jan '89. NOTE: Population and persons per household from'89 to '95 per State Department of finance. Actual percentage increases in population may be higher or ower than 2%. Calculation of building permit allocations is based on a 2% increase of the current year population figure. 9/8195 GMALL95.) LS LODI, CITY STAFF RECOMMENDED BUILDING PERMIT ALLOCATION SCHEDULE 1995 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS TO BE ALLOCATED FOR 1995 = 408 SINGLE FAMILY 65% = 265 N OF UNITS ALLOCATIONS ALLOC. NEEDED REQUESTED RECOMMENDED PROJECT 11 MAPPED I RECEIVED'89-4)4 I TO COMPLETE I ALLOC.199S 1 ALLOC.1995 TOWNE RANCH 363 366 37 37 37 PARISIS PROPERTY 0 0 39 38 38 THAYER PROPERTY 0 0 34 34 34 BRIDGETOWN 0 0 123 62 53 CENTURY MEADOWS 1 48 48 153 113 52 CENTURY MEADOWS 3 102 102 99 99 51 HELMLE PROPERTY 0 0 61 61 0 CENTURY MEADOWS 2 105 1051 58 1 58 0 6181F-62111 604 502 11 265 MEDIUM DENSITY 10% = 41 UNITS No projects have requested any of the 41, 1995 allocations for medium density units. HIGH DENSITY 25% = 99 + 101 + 101 + 100 + 100 + 101 + 102 = 704 UNITS No projects have requested any of the 102, 1995 allocations for high density units. Allocations from the previous years ('89294) are all available. 918195 GMALL95.XLS 1995 Development Plan Scoring Su NOTE: PROJECTS WITH 100 PTS. FOR CRITERIA "C" IIAVE REQUESTED ALLOCATIONS FOR PRIORITY AREA TWO. • A COMMITMENT FROM DEVELOPERS TO FRONT FUNDS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A MAJOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IS NECESSARY. CRITERIA DOES NOT APPLY TO SINGLE FAMILY PROJECTS 919193 GMALL95.XLS CRITERIA b� � a 3 � E w En rA 0 0 bo to r. m ri 0 .fir U N < iz PROJECT": D3. F---..,1'�-1G.-..-'�---.. H., TOWNE RANCH 7 7 200 5 8 8 4 0 81 0 0 20 10 277 PARISIS PROPERTY 5 0 200 3 0, 7 0 0 101 0 0 15 10 250 THAYER PROPERTY 3 0 200. 0 0 4 0 0 101 01 0 151 10 242 BRIDGETOWN 5 7 100 5 0 4 0 0 101 01 0 15 101 156 CENTURY MEADOWS 1 51 0 100 5 8 0 0 13 0 0 10 101 151 CENTURY MEADOWS 3 3 0 100 3 8 0 0 15 0 0 10 10 149 HELMLE PROPERTY 5 0 100 3 *1 ou 9 0 0 0 01 10 10 137 CENTURY MEADOWS 2 3 0 0 0 01 10 0 01 10 10 136 NOTE: PROJECTS WITH 100 PTS. FOR CRITERIA "C" IIAVE REQUESTED ALLOCATIONS FOR PRIORITY AREA TWO. • A COMMITMENT FROM DEVELOPERS TO FRONT FUNDS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A MAJOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IS NECESSARY. CRITERIA DOES NOT APPLY TO SINGLE FAMILY PROJECTS 919193 GMALL95.XLS N • a ' t .(1/5N.70 M07 - WiN30163b i Q �? VON Lim ?Rnjs3M ii i s t,GLC ' W ovoa Ol83MOI _ q • - - — a a x ,f W � C• y _ I mr ~ ti e Q x ,e W Y = f = � •= "� o J � W s � 01 y V aQ 1 d i �,,aer ,o U.l•]al wr .. - __ o: s m YO -.7y T B ! ,' X 4:I 'I:Iaa-�ak I�I i3 < the Q J ✓� �.\f t Y' r 4. t= �A�o, i r`:. 1 a-.r^'/•p. " 7` b `I` �y�l�l�l�� 2j � NJ 9H YM A elw1a�M,g •��r.�l ( p' `-� �i ! i �p� I I � �� W 4 �- O• - $�� .•. aro r.li s 1A 1 IO x Ix '^ ,Rip ate4. - -- I 1>A t•,� if ora aro if �� ^ i _ i 41 e �rxro raIacsro xortromaI aaarae000A a 3 (39AONN33d'9) AM17n w4f9V It t DS . F` a■wr r.i■.n - - - - . • w o as •a v j Y° I - x b u 4 - ar - .oixF C � css - xr�� m V x3a� o uw•e a■wr r.i■.n - - - - . • w o as •a v j Y° I - 4 - .oixF amu. a■wr r.i■.n - - - - . • w o as •a v j Y° I ATMA iury � u . Ar Ar -..t _,�...�_—., • , 1 IC!�-.iW r__�_.. -Tlr Ir 7!1' PROP EO i i _-----.— - JO.O-A[. - 1 ETSalon 31-17 i • ANMYr AWGr r PROPOSED -7.11AC. -.VP.T PARK SITE — F_ _i__ 1 •I I I I I I I I i� - ._ . 4 Z' It IT /t IS 11 IS 1E 1l Sr or h a a S. 1a E0 EI R IS _. r .� 4• 1 so � I / 11 Ldr ra : as :2: 2E Ir = Ir-- -- S = r— I ; y -1 _ _ as A I w w ` Z _ alAOaT sArr 1995 DEVELOPEMENT PLAN THAYER PROPERTY A PORTION OP THE SOI/TNEAST QUARTER OP SECTION IS T.S N.. R.6 L. N.O. .M. CRT OP LODI SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY.. CAUPORNIA MAY 1883 SCALE: 1' . 100' PREPARED POR: PREPARED 83': I6PPUT JORST aAUNDACH f PIAZZA. MC. P.O. B" SMA OA(•CA 9624urT (2081 v.-0 70 (209) 800-8818 M 1 r J !r i p PROPOSED PHASING AND LAND USE: IOss REQUESTED ALLOCATION - SA UNITS A-2 ZONING ...••, r.11r LAN.: 882-200-10 R 11 SU'US ADDRESS: E921 S. NAANIT UNE SOSI E. HAANEY LANE TRIT DEITLOPNENT CONTAINS 0.71 ACUS. wmn0w ®MAUMBACH 8 PIAZZA Is eW.V.Voiwtawa DEVELOPMENT PLAN LAND USE 9901 Damn Iu9MM901 9.1.0 CAVY. (995 OEVELOPEI(ENT PLAN BRIDGETOWNE I PORTIOM OP TME SOUTMUST QUARTER OP SICTIOM 55 TI M., As L. Y.D.R.lY.. CITY Of LOW SLY JOAQVIS COUNTY, CALLPDAMIA YAY, 1995 SCALE: 1" - 100' PIICPALVD P0A' PREPARED Mr. - PAID AAAEA ,W DAUMSACY A PWZA, INC. 317 -sr LORI AtENUE s22 Jr. ELY STALIT LaDLCA IS219 LOW, CA 95210 (En) 7]I -ren (209) m -/IIS I I ISIS AEQUISTE9 ALLMIROM - ES UNITS, A-. EWWG �- 119 !�' Ilt II14 1111 120 �; Ixl �_ In y]t 34 n TLLTUAE- AOCATION - Ei UMTS OI/-ASO-IELL! SI ' ! a sz • ]. as 2/ • A n VMS AODRISS. ISL LAST TUANSR AOAD 115 • - J _ j PROPOSED 1995 AUOGRON L'OMTYMS 22.1 ACRES. - • 1 __ 1 _ _ _ .I ..., _. 21 1YITURE ALLOCATION CWAMS 15.7 ACUS. JIM—t14 I_ Ay N '. at 64 !� 45 N �. 22 Y '� ]1 70 fj >Z • 77 >• 30 M r r .4•. i 95,.1 AS-L.11.l.-_R!_i_7L. r 117 ; 70 T L 12 __...tf!S.__ M ''�. 17 5' N, W • AI f90,001D _ Eli 71 a L5 pOiCpytp Jt•!_-_� 1 9 lI '•Nif- 1 IIfY0tlm11 r _ G • F . 79- 9 5 11 • 111 N I itd I 91•... Y. 5CA12: 1' -loo• ISO 1r.T... _ I ^ 99 f 11 a I9 • l01 I «• — --- AMY . h . p u L2 fTj51 t10 C (' p _Ir•_ Mriina Y L)L -u E' t7 .� 91 01 /1 W1«ua1 _.IEC 101 P JI [ 1] t � -1111__. -_-_..- !r N a o W 904.0 ` 107 t. I 15 E --. WWIt1all f Ii 51 _ .W• 44 ti y ON � �12 . j ` 'i �, so 21 s a i% \ —1— —•--- --- 7] . to 97 107 , 'L1( , 102 101 to ,9 �. i0 .t ; a 1• Y1i91cu� Mw 1 U . I f •, j r _ I• I.si�«. Ma R 2t O 1 e 7• 1 2 I.2 t 2 TURNER ROAD 19101 a,..«v 11 NNS INH YY _ IY! . I ®■AUMMACM 6 PIAZZA 1! C1v • •tio1NMMw■ USE PatRu1ivRyons DMWPENENP PLAN LAND +6 IO/9 a� w! a 1 1 I S N Y I Y SA IS O a l O f T N 0 0 R a I • � - - c 1 � � p- • i - _ _ �, '�==T_="I�T� �J YO 1 SOI 9.V 1 x 1 7 Il iS1Yl YO J I s I j- -s- I `_ la it _ _ _ I _ arSAINC a 7/r N13RSJ •) _ - aYJ JoorY771Y �S s 4' a 1: :lay � �, ' •'' i :' 7 . I d"'i 1Cr�ln�rr �Oi - � real o•r 1 ! Z -' I. —y _a. r' - I •• •1rr s1 r,, ralra,a � ' `1 •� .r- _I.i . - r• I O MM -' I •1 =i 1.0 a o �� H ^I 3: • . . r. � 1 �• N~v V �� M� C a 1� A .. tib i _'_ -------------- V � a '• a i = l a! i! i! a' a l a l: i i i 8 UL I, I ,w►7 t,wY►Y--, a 1 a SAIYV a - rlDesalt a cq ANWM ' �T:!� :a 2 � r 1 2 Z g t a2•'i�e 2 - I X' opo , V wll,7 ' - 3 _ 2 2. i � �♦ ]i �� 43w 2 -I- Q wr 7a Zi tai SArra — JAy rwvsrw a Y `i& - b 2 _ _•; -_• u�g.`=y' �s :• 'alt L a s• I;,.,= ,• � I I r"' _.. `-,-- - :� -� S_a •;:moi:_^ _� 1 _Jj �--i---' �� = SA IMC NAO.csrwrr , j ►` 'I rr ;� ' �- - - -'•' "tl "SI `S 185: � I S�it� I � —:: :-a n;.�� ? "1 �h � ..ir. ::,•"•.mss° �:.:: m;At-�LSi9i:ti'7S' li t;--�� r,s,a.a I t A A I J N I O l A 0 V d a - •s � •I r, Y 5 - � �_.-_ � --..II it -- : ! , I 4 ^E . II•. -L u' is r L—' I S-_ �Z—� J� �L +t� a 1 r� ° "O"aH a " r I r .I I It ur I _ �� ._� 1— - '- �.•�N � IL's.= ` _—s ^ 1= d : !ff .(\; �.1� rAlra xratxua,[ , I a - "01 T A If O A Y A.1 y_ 5 5 :—� I I I ... i .__.1 L---� /n -aa ! • Y - i 1 Ya <lMA y r+ o 'a p OC m0 OCL 0 E OL 0Q;9QL U O 0 J1 i � �dumyyA W pK�V J Q (=^�Q� Q SNi ci0 OWFL� Na uWoO$v .W.1 vi m Q�000 0 N E O a .a >< 7M7n. STU anciow 0 J� ai 'e1 W C 02. 14 4J _ w tl L ra � {. f■ K�yp�=� ..t. ' .n oc O O i� ...•. v N Iq O Q` C1 N } RA �+ Raa Ra In' C zv—i —¢ 7 .1 K aS u C Y �raa ,sa. • '. a � M..LS a � I I I i . f I,I I I i 1 i + I 7 I 1. t� as►7 issars 9 aYe II No i D fA _• Q ksti o—a _ 1A141a 41v a iE-A11 s7 . It 1 1 . 1 ' 1 rll -✓� 1 'I� ^ i —A I ^ 41■ II „ a � I e ' 1, ._t—• 'I e a 70 sAotsawrr ir I.�I; ! wl ^■'.^s, `r■ -I I sN'T 1s11111s 7+ 1 fa 11 X101 ■ OYI ■ —_ a ■ Vim "mom I —Ir Ara` 1 N010N711141 '0•I la 1 Yt73 X17 --''a9'=OP== `'�'� •_-__� __--- b0-------------- ■ - ■ a■ a■■ a a a a. a alg'ala�a'sigla mi CITY COUNCIL AWARDED BUILDING PERMIT ALLOCATIONS 1989 -1994 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOCATED (1989 -1994) = 2,406 SINGLE FAMILY 65% = 1,564 UNITS PROJECT N OF UNITS IN SUBDIVISION 11 ALLOCATIONS RECEIVED'89 ALLOCATIONS RECEIVED'90 ALLOCATIONS RECEIVED'91 ALLOCATIONS RECEIVED 92 ALLOCATIONS RECEIVED 93 ALLOCATIONS RECEIVED 94 • ALLOCATION TOTALS BANG'S RANCH 123 34 35 35 0 0 19 123 CENTURY MEADOWS 1 201 16 16 16 0 0 0 48 CENTURY MEADOWS 2 163 25 26 25 0 29 0 105 CENTURY MEADOWS 3 201 24 24 25 0 29 0 102 CENTURY MEADOWS 4 120 29 29 29 33 0 0 120 COLVIN RANCH 60 20 20 20 0 0 0 60 FUGAZI BROTHERS 5 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 JOHNSON RANCH 2 173 43 43 43 44 0 0 173 LODI WEST 284 26 27 27 80 55 69 284 LODI ESTATES 65 6 7 6 46 0 35 100 RICHARD'S RANCH 114 0 0 0 0 34 0 34 RI VERPOINTE 44 0 0 0 0 0 44 44 TOWNE RANCH 403 35 36 36 56 52 151 366 1,956 2581 263 1 262 1 2591 204 1 31811 1,564 • 57 allocations remained from the'93 allocation year, giving UK City a total of318 single family units to allocate for 1994• MEDIUM DENSITY 10% = 241 UNITS # OF UNITS I ALLOCATIONS I ALLOCATIONS I ALLOCATIONS I ALLOCATIONS I ALLOCATIONS 1 ALLOCATIONS ALLOCATION PROJECT IN SUBDIVISION RECEIVED'89 RECEIVED'90 RECEIVED'91 RECEIVED92 RECEIVED930 RECEIVED94 TOTALS BANG'S RANCH ** 36 18 18 0 0 0 -36 0 LODI WEST 57 0 0 0 0 57 0 57 BRIDGEHAVEN 50 22 22 6 0 0 0 50 LODI ESTATES ** 22 0 0 22 0 0 -22 0 WOODHAVEN PARK 11 7511 01 01 0 0 75 01 75 -11 24011 40 1 40 1 281 01 132 -5811 182 • In 93 the Planning Commission awarded 40, 1994 medium density allocations to the Lodi West project. •• The Bangs Ranch and Lodi Estates projects each were awarded single family allocations in place of their medium density allocations. III011 DENSITY 23% = 602 UNITS N OF PROJECT I IN SUBDIVIITS ION I RECEIVED 9S I RECEIVED'90 I ECEIV D'91S I EVED'92 BENNETT & COMPTON 144 99 45 0 11 144 99 45 0 • The Bennett and Compton project was awarded 75 medium density allocations under the project name of Woodhaven Park. ALLOCATIONS I ALLOCATIONS RECEIVED 93 0 -144 0 -144 ALLOCATIONS ALLOCATION RECEIVED 94 TOTALS 0 01 0 9/8/95 GMALL95.XLS CITY OF LODI NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Date: November 1, 1995 Carnegie Forum 305 West Pine Street, Lodi Time: 7:00 p.m. For information regarding this notice please contact: Jennifer M. Perrin City Clerk Telephone: (209) 333-6702 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, November 1, 1995 at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a Public Hearing to consider the following matter: a) Consider Planning Commission's recommendation that City Council adopt the 1995 Growth Management Allocations. Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the Community Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested persons are invited to present their views and comments on this matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the hearing scheduled herein, and oral statements may be made at said hearing. If you challenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to the Public Hearing. By Order of the Lodi City Council: i `�ernn i Clerk ✓' Dated: October 5, 1995 Approd as o form: John Luebberke Deputy City Attorney J:VTYCLRt(WORMSINOTCOD. DOC 1013195 �OF� QL/FORS` Public Hearin -1995 Groh Management Allocations Management Allocations On October 5, 1995 in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, I deposited in the United States mail, envelopes with first-class postage prepaid thereon, containing a copy of the Notice attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A"; said envelopes were addressed as is more particularly shown on Exhibit "B" attached hereto. There is a regular daily communication by mail between the City of Lodi, California, and the places to which said envelopes were addressed. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on October 5, 1995, at Lodi, California. Jennifer M. Perrin City Clerk decmai I/forms Delmar Batch 1767 E. Harney Lane Lodi, CA 95240 Lewis Homes of California 9216 Kiefer Blvd. Sacramento, CA 95827 Fred Baker & Chris Keszler 317 W. Lodi Avenue Lodi, CA 95240 Angelos Parisis 9949 Fernwood Road Ctncktnn r A 45717 11111111111 11111.1 11111111111111 Lee Developments c/o Robert L. Lee P.O. Box 3116 San Leandro, CA 94578 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11111 111 1111 111 J. Jeffrey Kirst P.O. Box 1259 Woodbridge, CA 95258 Dennis Bennett P.O. Box 1597 Lodi, CA 95241 13AUMBACH & PIAZZA 323 W. ELM STREET ODI, CA 95240 1111161111111 .................. STOCKTON RECORD ATTN: RICH HANNER 101 W. LOCUST ST. 94 LODI, CA 95240